You’re welcome.

I was perplexed however by this portion of your response, as I don’t recall offering opposition to this idea:

“i think isfjs don't seek new experiences which would reinforce a set of previous experiences. i believe that Si is more keen on gaining "pleasant or generally desirable novel sensory experiences" than Se.”

In fact yes, I agree that the Si dominant is more apt to seek pleasant sensory experiences than an Se dominant would, which I believe was my overall point. Si as a ‘function’ however is primarily a recall process which archives information, it is not ’actively seeking’ anything, especially in the way of Se. My apologies if I hadn’t made that clear, and please point out which part of my response gave an impression otherwise.

As for the idea of the influence of Fe I would offer that what has become the textbook understanding of Fe as dictating what sensory experiences are either “approved” or “frowned upon” I would take with large dashes of salt, especially if we’re discussing a very Ti heavy subtype or the SiFe at that. It is my belief that this perspective leaves too much room for the people pleasing stereotype people of this cognition already bear. It is one of those things that may be true for a segment of the population, but I would not rely on this perception for the whole. In fact I would further suggest that such a level of devotion to the approval of others is experienced by a number of other ‘types’ beside the SiFe, and that it is a behavioral construct lying outside the purview if cognition.

However, I do agree with you in that the Si dominant is in no way as explorative as the SeTi, it’s simply not the way of introverted perception as a lead process. Though there are some SiFe who possess a conscious Ne that compels them to a degree of exploration beyond the average, I would say they potentially represent a relative minority.